Talk:List of Amanita species

A. rubescens?
A valid species? Also: strangulata? Said: Rursus ☻ 10:42, 13 September 2007 (UTC)

Dangerous icons!
The icon for poisonous should definitely NOT be green! On a small screen you don't see the sad mouth... I'll change it to a less "friendly" color. --Janke | Talk 10:26, 6 October 2009 (UTC)

Super Mario
Mario and Luigi kills broomrape and rapes bowser--Zakawer (talk) 17:51, 7 December 2010 (UTC)

Childish icons
Is this list just for mushroom eaters? - Assuming "no" for an answer here, I'd say that they are misplaced here and just look childish.--Natr (talk) 20:57, 30 May 2012 (UTC)
 * You didn't ask in a particularly collegial way, but I replaced them with the icons from the mycomorphbox. This should be done at the other list pages too if you feel like helping with that. de Bivort 21:29, 30 May 2012 (UTC)

External links modified
Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified one external link on List of Amanita species. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:
 * Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20060924211409/http://www.plantlife.org.uk/uk/assets/saving-species/saving-species-publications/recommended-english-names-for-fungi.pdf to http://www.plantlife.org.uk/uk/assets/saving-species/saving-species-publications/recommended-english-names-for-fungi.pdf

When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.

Cheers.— InternetArchiveBot  (Report bug) 02:23, 17 May 2017 (UTC)

Edibility indicators
I'm surprised to run across the edibility indicators, as displayed at present (apparently from the howEdible field of the mycomorphbox), for a few reasons: It's a nice list, but these edibility cartoons seem quite dubious to me, as implemented here. &mdash; soupvector (talk) 00:18, 4 July 2017 (UTC)
 * 1) there is no legend given, so the reader is left to guess what they mean
 * 2) it's not obvious how the choice of indicator, which appears to lack any direct citation (to evidence), is kept in sync with any (well-sourced, presumably) changes that might occur in sub-pages
 * 3) the implications and interpretation of these indicators are not simple - and the lack of linkage to reliable sources seems risky